Edward Snowden worked for the defense contractor Booz Allen Hamilton for 3 months, ending May 30. Glenn Greenwall has said he started working with this informant in February.

Sounds to me more like espionage than journalism.

What also is incredibly scary is the realization that thousands of private defense contractor firms control the flow of information, and how seemingly easy it was to let an operative with dubious intentions gain security clearance and access to all of it.

They should absolutely throw the book at this guy -- and at anyone who may have aided and abetted him, even if they're a "journalist" (just because you may be a member of the Fourth Estate, you don't get a free pass to suborn possible espionage). Obviously, I agree with Gary on this one -- nothing he leaked was proof of anything illegal or of any wrongdoing. (As a note -- even if those leaks did provide such evidence, he *still* should be prosecuted -- he broke the law either way. The latter case would merely provide mitigating circumstances at the sentencing).

Anyways, simy disagreeing with established US law doesn't give one license to break it ...

* Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the LawJurisdiction: (1) Oversight of laws and policies governing the collection, protection, use and dissemination of commercial information by the private sector, including online behavioral advertising, privacy within social networking websites and other online privacy issues; (2) Enforcement and implementation of commercial information privacy laws and policies; (3) Use of technology by the private sector to protect privacy, enhance transparency and encourage innovation; (4) Privacy standards for the collection, retention, use and dissemination of personally identifiable commercial information; and (5) Privacy implications of new or emerging technologies.

I don't doubt at all that the whole business was legal--unlike the initial trolling by the Bush administration, which by-passed the FISA courts entirely. The question, now as when the rules were rewritten to accommodate the Bush practices, is whether we want a country where this kind of thing happens.

Digital technology is never going reverse itself and get less powerful and omnipresent. When the administration is able to be heard above all this hyperbole, people may actually understand that Obama has strengthened oversight. He made the claim just a few days ago as to challenge the press corp to review the history:

"So in summary, what you've got is two programs that were originally authorized by Congress, have been repeatedly authorized by Congress, bipartisan majorities have approved on them, Congress is continually briefed on how these are conducted. There are a whole range of safeguards involved, and federal judges are overseeing the entire program throughout. We're also setting up -- we've also set up an audit process, when I came into office, to make sure that we're, after the fact, making absolutely certain that all the safeguards are being properly observed. "

Digital technology is never going reverse itself and get less powerful and omnipresent.

Technology, perhaps. But our government is supposed to be accountable to the people, and if the outrage is large enough, it *can* be made less omnipresent and powerful -- kind of like what happened to create this country in the first place ;-)

And, for better or worse, I believe the public by and large are disinclined to simply take the government's (read: Obama or any other president) word that "safeguards are being properly observed" -- especially regarding utterly opaque programs against which the average citizen has no course of redress should he even be allowed to know they exist ...

My .02: It sucks that this is happening  been happening, more to the point, in one form or another for quite some time. But objectively speaking, I can sort of accept the national security argument.

I look at the difference btwn the abuse of power, and the abuse of people. The clandestine nature of the program tilts toward the former. But until  and if ever  the latter becomes evident, I can live with. I can dislike it  and I do  but there are worse things. And in that context, I really prefer that Congress get behind the POTUS and start putting as much effort into jobs, education, equal rights, and the economy as has gone into Scandalmania.

Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.

All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.